WHO 


WAS  OLD  MOTHER 
HUBBARD  ? 


A MODERN  SERMON 


THE  PORTSMOUTH  (ENG.)  MONITOR] 


AND 


A REFUTATION 


(By.  an  M.  M.  C.) 


NEW  YORK 

G.  P.  PUTNAM’S  SONS 

Ittutkerbothw  Jims 
1885 


WHO 


I 


Who  was  Old  Mother  Hubbard? 


A MODERN  SERMON 


ILLUSTRATING  THE  METHOD 

Upon  which  some  Parsons  Construct 
their  Discourses 


SECOND  EDITION. 


New  York 

G.  P.  PUTNAM’S  SONS 

27  AND  29  WEST  23D  STREET 


Press  of 

G.  P.  Putnam’s  Sons 

New  York 


1 


Z27 

va2« 


SERMON 


Brethren  : 

The  words  of  my  text  are  : 

“ Old  Mother  Hubbard,  she  went  to  the  cupboard, 
To  get  her  poor  dog  a bone; 

But  when  she  got  there,  the  cupboard  was  bare, 
And  so  the  poor  dog  had  none.” 

These  beautiful  words,  dear  friends,  carry 
with  them  a solemn  lesson. 

I propose  this  evening  to  analyze  their  mean- 
ing, and  to  attempt  to  apply  it,  lofty  as  it  may 
be,  to  our  every-day  life. 

“ Old  Mother  Hubbard,  she  went  to  the  cupboard, 


To  get  her  poor  dog  a bone.” 


Mother  Hubbard,  you  see,  was  old  ; there 
being  no  mention  of  others,  we  may  presume 
she  was  alone  ; a widow — a friendless,  old,  soli- 
tary widow. 

Yet,  did  she  despair?  Did  she  sit  down  and 
weep,  or  read  a novel,  or  wring  her  hands  ? 
No  ! “she  went  to  the  cupboard And  here 


4 


observe  that  she  went  to  the  cupboard.  She 
did  not  hop,  or  skip,  or  run,  or  jump,  or  use 
any  other  peripatetic  artifice  ; she  solely  and 
merely  went  to  the  cupboard. 

We  have  seen  that  she  was  old  and  lonely, 
and  we  now  further  see  that  she  was  poor 
For,  mark,  the  words  are  “ the  cupboard.” 

Not  “ one  of  the  cupboards,”  or  the  “ right- 
hand  cupboard,”  or  the  “ left-hand  cupboard,” 
or  the  one  above,  or  the  one  below,  or  the  one 
under  the  stair,  but  just  the  cupboard.  The 
one  little  humble  cupboard  the  poor  widow 
possessed.  And  why  did  she  go  to  the  cup- 
board ? Was  it  to  bring  forth  golden  goblets, 
or  glittering  precious  stones,  or  costly  apparel, 
or  feasts,  or  any  other  attributes  of  wealth  ? It 
was  to  get  her  poor  dog  a bone  ! N ot  only  was 
the  widow  poor,  but  her  dog,  the  sole  prop  of 
her  age,  was  poor  too. 

We  can  imagine  the  scene.  The  poor  dog 
crouching  in  the  corner,  looking  wistfully  at 
the  solitary  cupboard,  and  the  widow  going  to 
that  cupboard — in  hope,  in  expectation  maybe 
— to  open  it,  although  we  are  not  distinctly 
told  that  it  was  not  half  open,  or  ajar,  to  open 
it  for  that  poor  dog. 


5 


“ But  when  she  got  there,  the  cupboard  was  bare, 
And  so  the  poor  dog  had  none.” 


“When  she  got  there!”  You  see,  dear 
brethren,  what  perseverance  is. 

You  see  the  beauty  of  persistence  in  doing 
right.  She  got  there. 

There  were  no  turnings  and  twistings,  no 
slippings  and  slidings,  no  leaning  to  the  right, 
or  falterings  to  the  left. 

With  glorious  simplicity  we  are  told  she  got 

there. 

And  how  was  her  noble  effort  rewarded  ? 

“The  cupboard  was  bare!”  It  was  bare! 
There  were  to  be  found  neither  oranges,  nor 
cheesecakes,  nor  penny  buns,  nor  gingerbread, 
nor  crackers,  nor  nuts,  nor  lucifer  matches. 

The  cupboard  was  bare  ! 

There  was  but  one,  only  one,  solitary  cup- 
board in  the  whole  of  that  cottage,  and  that 
one,  the  sole  hope  of  the  widow  and  the  glori- 
ous loadstar  of  the  poor  dog,  was  bare ! Had 
there  been  a leg  of  mutton,  a loin  of  lamb,  a 
fillet  of  veal,  even  an  ice  from  Gunter’s,  the 
case  would  have  been  different,  the  incident 
would  have  been  otherwise. 


..  6 

But  it  was  bare,  my  brethren,  bare  as  a bald 
head,  bare  as  an  infant  born  without  a caul. 

Many  of  you  will  probably  say,  with  all  the 
pride  of  worldly  sophistry,  “ The  widow,  no 
doubt,  went  out,  and  bought  a dog-biscuit.” 

Ah,  no  ! Far  removed  from  these  earthly 
ideas,  these  mundane  desires,  poor  Mother 
Hubbard,  the  widow,  whom  many  thoughtless 
worldlings  would  despise,  in  that  she  only  owned 
one  cupboard,  perceived — or  I might  even  say, 
saw— at  once  the  relentless  logic  of  the  situa- 
tion, and  yielded  to  it  with  all  the  heroism  of 
that  nature,  which  had  enabled  her  without 
deviation  to  reach  the  barren  cupboard. 

She  did  not  attempt,  like  the  stiff-necked 
scoffers  of  this  generation,  to  war  against  the 
inevitable  ; she  did  not  try,  like  the  so-called 
men  of  science,  to  explain  what  she  did  not 
understand. 

She  did  nothing.  “ The  poor  dog  had 
none  !”  And  then,  at  this  point,  our  informa- 
tion ceases. 

But  do  we  not  know  sufficient  ? Are  we 
not  cognizant  of  enough  ? 

Who  would  dare  to  pierce  the  veil  that 
shrouds  the  ulterior  fate  of  old  Mother  Hub- 


7 


bard,  the  poor  dog,  the  cupboard,  or  the  bone 
that  was  not  there  ? 

Must  we  imagine  her  still  standing  at  the 
open  cupboard  door — depict  to  ourselves  the 
dog  still  drooping  his  disappointed  tail  upon 
the  floor — the  sought-  for  bone  still  remaining 
somewhere  else  ? 

Ah  ! no,  my  dear  brethren,  we  are  not  so 
permitted  to  attempt  to  read  the  future.  Suf- 
fice it  for  us  to  glean  from  this  beautiful  story 
its  many  lessons  ; suffice  it  for  us  to  apply 
them,  to  study  them  as  far  as  in  us  lies,  and, 
bearing  in  mind  the  natural  frailty  of  our  na- 
ture, to  avoid  being  widows ; to  shun  the 
patronymic  of  Hubbard  ; to  have,  if  our  means 
afford  it,  more  than  one  cupboard  in  the  house, 
and  to  keep  stores  in  them  all. 

And  oh  ! dear  friends,  keeping  in  recollec- 
tion what  we  have  learned  this  day,  let  us  avoid 
keeping  dogs  that  are  fond  of  bones. 

But,  brethren,  if  we  do — if  fate  has  ordained 
that  we  should  do  any  of  these  things — let  us 
then  go,  as  Mother  Hubbard  did,  straight, 
without  curveting  or  prancing,  to  our  cupboard, 
empty  though  it  be  ; let  us,  like  her,  accept 
the  inevitable  with  calm  steadfastness ; and 


8 


should  we,  like  her,  ever  be  left  with  a hungry 
dog  and  an  empty  cupboard,  may  future  chro- 
niclers be  able  to  write  also  of  us,  in  the  beau- 
tiful words  of  our  text : 

“ And  so  the  poor  dog  had  rone.” 

—Portsmouth  {Eng. ) Monitor. 


Who  was  Old  Mother  Hubbard? 


A REFUTATION 

IN  THE 

COMB  A LIVE, 

LUCID,  and 

ARGUMENTATIVE  STYLE 


OF  SOME  OTHERS 


1 1 


A REFUTATION. 


My  dear  Hearers  : 

It  is  my  purpose  this  evening  to  give  to  you 
the  result  of  many  hours  of  thought  and  con- 
sultation of  various  writers,  regarding  the  sub- 
ject to  which  our  attention  has  been  lately 
called. 

While  I hesitate  to  engage  in  the  controver- 
sial spirit  of  the  day,  I feel  it  my  duty  to  ex- 
pound to  you  the  truth,  and  to  unmask  any 
heresy  that  may  be  gaining  ground. 

The  discourse  to  which  I allude  was  upon 
the  text  : 

“ Old  Mother  Hubbard  went  to  the  cupboard, 

To  get  her  poor  dog  a bone; 

But  when  she  got  there,  the  cupboard  was  bare, 

And  so  the  poor  dog  had  none.” 

I propose  to  prove  to  you  this  evening,  that 
all  its  arguments  were  founded  on  false  premi- 
ses ; that  the  whole  pichire  drawn  of  the  sub- 
ject of  our  text — viz.,  old  Mother  Hubbard — 
was  diametrically  the  reverse  of  the  reality  ; in 


12 


short,  to  give  a complete  refutation  of  the  text, 
to  all  those  who  listened  to  those  first  errone- 
ous statements. 

Firstly : Old  Mother  Hubbard  was  not  a 
widow. 

I am  at  a loss  to  understand  why  our  learned 
brother  should  so  have  drawn  upon  his  imagina- 
tion as  to  represent  her  as  such,  when,  as  I 
shall  endeavor  to  set  before  you  conclusively  this 
evening,  it  is  distinctly  stated  in  the  text,  that 
she  was  the  wife  of  an  ogre  ! 

My  friends,  in  those  days,  men  and  husbands 
were  designated  by  the  term,  “ poor  dog  and, 
indeed,  the  lightest  scholar  knows  that  the  term 
has  descended  to  the  present  day,  and  is  often 
appropriated  by  a man  himself  under  certain 
existing  circumstances. 

Now,  that  this  “ poor  dog”  of  a husband 
was  an  ogre,  is  abundantly  proved  by  the  fact 
that  Mother  Hubbard  provided  for  him  bones. 

Y es  ! bones  ! my  friends  ; but — they — were 
— human — bones  ! 

Deep  research  has  convinced  me  of  this  fact. 
I find  that  in  those  days  ogres  did  not  catch 
and  kill  their  own  meat,  as  is  commonly  sup- 
posed. 


i3 


They  were  but  human,  my  friends,  and,  like 
the  rest  of  humanity,  preferred  rather  to  pur- 
chase labor  than  perform  it.  They,  therefore, 
employed  their  own  individual  butchers ; but, 
with  rare  wisdom,  they  chose  some  carnivorous 
animal  to  supply  their  table. 

In  proof  of  this,  we  come,  Secondly,  to  the 
word  cupboard,  as  mentioned  in  the  text : 

“Old  Mother  Hubbard  went  to  the  cupboard, 

• To  get  her  poor  dog  a bone.” 

This  word  cupboard  is  in  our  present  version 
misspelt,  owing  to  some  fault  in  copying  from 
the  original,  and  thus  is  rendered  c-u-p- 
b-o-a-r-d ; but  the  word  properly  should  be 
spelt  c-u-b-b-e-d. 

This  is  a compound  word,  derived  from  cub 
— a young  bear — and  bed,  or  deposit,  as  we 
*speak  of  the  bed  of  a river. 

This  was  a bone  deposit — a place  where  the 
ogre’s  food  was  deposited  by  the  cub. 

A young  cub  was  a less  expensive  butcher 
than  a bear,  as,  nowadays,  labor  is  cheaper 
from  the  young  aspirant,  than  from  the  assured 
professional. 

Therefore  they  were  the  usual  employees. 


H 


But  this  ogre,  though  evidently  in  the  habit 
of  employing  a cub  in  this  department,  had 
now  become  dissatisfied,  and  procured  the  more 
satisfactory  services  of  an  old  bear  ; for,  if  you 
will  carefully  examine  the  text,  you  will  see 
that  this  meaning  is  obvious , for,  as  though  to 
insure  all  its  readers  from  misunderstanding, 
you  will  see  that  it  is  distinctly  stated  that 

“ The  cub-bed  was  bear!' 

Now  we  come,  Thirdly , to  the  word 
“none.”  This  word  in  the  original  stands  for 
two  things — first,  n-o-n-e,  meaning — nothing, 
which  was  the  heretical  sense  deducted  by  my 
opponent,  and  the  other  and  correct  sense  being, 
n-u-n — a woman  with  black  veil,  generally  of 
tender  years  ; and  Mother  Hubbard,  who  in- 
tended to  supply  her  lord’s  table  with  one  small 
bone,  found  that  instead,  the  bear  had  secured  * 
the  bones  of  a whole  nun  ! 

Fourthly  and  lastly,  it  is  clear,  from  the 
words  “poor  dog,”  that  the  ogre  was  poor,  but 
not  Mother  Hubbard. 

No,  my  hearers,  evidently  she  was  rich,  evi- 
dently she  held  the  purse-strings,  and  the  ogre 
had  stealthily  supplied  his  table  with  a luxury, 


i5 


and  his  house  with  a steward,  for  which  he 
individually  was  incapable  of  providing  the 
means. 

This  is  clearly  the  fact  from  the  words  of  the 
text,  for  you  will  notice  that  it  was  when  she 
got  there — not  before,  but  when  she  got  there — 
that  she  found  the  change  that  had  been  made 
in  the  household  arrangements. 

And  then,  doubtless,  ensued  a scene  such  as 
some  “ poor  dogs”  nowadays  understand  only 
too  well ! 

And  now,  my  friends,  we  come  to  the  moral. 
It  is  not  to  beware  of  widows,  as  my  opponent 
tried  to  prove,  but  for  you,  my  hearers,  on  one 
hand,  to  beware  of  marrying  a poor  but  ex- 
travagant dog,  and  you,  on  the  other,  to  beware 
,of  marrying  a rich  and  penurious  wife. 


